This review of Google Daydream View, penned by Jamison Cush, is thorough and comprehensive. There are no mentions of VR porn or BaDoinkVR, but that can be forgiven. When I read an article, and note that kind of omission, I’m always inclined to blame the editor.

Bird's eye view of Google Daydream View HMD

Bird’s eye view of Google Daydream View

He praises the design and feel of the device, as well as the intuitive remote. Unfortunately, there are some damning drawbacks to the new Daydream Viewer, specifically an unimpressive 110° field of view and insufferable amount of light leak. Light leak, in all HMDs, in this nascent stage of VR development, is unavoidable, but Cush points out that in the case of Daydream Viewer, the leakage is flood-like.

I take all of his comments to heart. What worries me about this write-up is that it underscores a persistent Google deficiency: they simply fall short when it comes to developing physical devices.

Of course, even if Daydream Viewer never improves adequately enough in subsequent iterations, all is not lost. So many manufacturers are on board with the Daydream platform, and I reckon many of those will develop their own headset, and maybe most of those will be vastly better than Google’s.

Still, it does not make for the best first impression, especially if you’ve been called the Gear VR Killer for nearly a year.